quote:
Originally posted by ken roberts on 10-28-1999 01:43 PM
This is a false double foul, very similar to Case 4.19.8A. There is a player-control foul on A1 which means the basket is canceled. A1 shoots two free-throws for being fouled on the shot. After the second throw, Team B gets the ball OOB at the designated spot for the player-control foul.
would the call be different if A1 had not shot the ball but just landed on B2 still holding the ball
If you decide that A1's movements qualify for continuous motion, then the ruling is the same.
Otherwise, you'd just have a common foul on B1.
Ken's explanation sounds complete and accurate to me. In a real game situation, however, A1 would have had to really come down explosively on B2 for me to call that foul. For any of you who are going to argue "what constitutes continuous motion", read this year's Points Of Emphasis. It confirms what I was told at a clinic about 3 years ago - only the NBA gets this call RIGHT!